Samsung Start menu app shows why Microsoft is going its own way with Surface

New range of AIO Windows 8 PCs to include Start menu knockoff.

Samsung today announced three all-in-one desktop systems designed for Windows 8. They range from a $749 Series 5 system with a 21.5" 1920×1080 screen, Intel Ivy Bridge Core i3-3220T processor, 4 GB RAM, and integrated HD Graphics 4000, up to a $1699 Series 7 system with a 27" 1920×1080 screen, Core i7-3770T processor, and Radeon HD 7850M graphics. All three systems will ship with Windows 8, and all three systems include a 10-point multitouch screen for easier use of Metro applications.

Dressed all in black, the systems look more like TVs or consumer electronics than they do PCs. Nonetheless, they're fitted out with all mod cons; gigabit wired Ethernet and 802.11 b/g/n Wi-Fi, Bluetooth 4.0, a 1.3 megapixel webcam claiming support for "hand gesture recognition," USB 3 and HDMI ports, card readers, and so on. Full specs can be found in Samsung's press release.

More interesting than the PCs themselves, however, is the software that's bundled with them. Pre-installed software is nothing new to the world of PCs, of course. It has earned a deserved reputation as bloatware or crapware, and most users would be better off removing it. These Samsung machines are no exception; they come with some bundled applications.

Some of them, such as a Jamie Oliver-branded cooking application—Samsung is positioning the 21.5" model as the perfect kitchen computer—are inoffensive enough. But another of the bundled applications is raising eyebrows.

First reported by Mashable, the all-in-one systems will include a program called "S Launcher." This desktop application provides a crude replica of a Windows XP-era Luna-styled Start menu along with a settings app that provides access to settings that are equally found in Control Panel.

The Windows 8 user experience is polarizing, to say the least. The loss of the Start button and the replacement of the Start menu by the functionally similar, but substantially larger, Start screen is inevitably going to cause some shock and discomfort among new Windows 8 users. But it's also an intrinsic, unavoidable part of the Windows 8 experience. Windows 8 users will have to use the Start screen and will have to get used to it. If the Windows 8 store thrives, Windows 8 users will even want to use the Start screen, because it will be chock full of useful tiles and the applications that they want to use.

As such, S Launcher is just delaying the inevitable. It might seem familiar to users, but it will in practice stand in the way of their ability to learn and use the new operating system. And even that familiarity seems superficial; a number of third-party Start menu applications are available, and they do a much more authentic job of replicating the Start menu than S Launcher does.

This kind of application is exactly why Microsoft is producing its own line of Windows 8 tablets. The company wants the Windows 8 user experience to be just so. Microsoft is working to ensure that it's right—to ensure that it's appealing, and works well without unnecessary impediments.

And impeding the user experience is exactly what this kind of bundled application does. Samsung may be the first to have its alternative UI plans outed, but it's unlikely to be the only OEM to bundle software with Windows 8 to reinstate the Start menu in some shape or form. PC OEMs have a long history of including such apps, even when totally alien (such as OS X-style Dock knockoffs). These applications rarely work very well, and just serve to make the interface non-standard. Microsoft wants consistency and predictability, and these applications are in direct opposition to that goal.

Microsoft has long wanted to control the Windows user experience, but never as much as it does with Windows 8—because the user experience has never been as contentious as it is with Windows 8. As long as the OEMs demonstrate they don't really care about preserving the Windows feel, the company has a strong incentive to compete with the OEMs head on.

322 Reader Comments

And I am quite happy with Windows 7 64-Bit and anticipate that I can skip this Windows 8 and stick with my setup which works great for me.Everything I am using works fast and smooth.

This is my final stance as well. And if Windows 9 comes out and irks me as much as Windows 8 does, then I'll finally become a Apple full time user, something I've not been since the Apple II.

The new versions of Windows are so different and scary to you that you are going to change platforms instead of using them, because that's what a rational person does: doesn't like change, deliberately chooses a larger change.

That makes no sense.

I love my Mac and OS X is a fine choice for many reasons, but avoiding this push to UI integration isn't one of them. OS X becomes characteristically more iOS-like with every iteration and Apple has never been hesitant to shake up their user interfaces: Pinstripes, Aqua, brushed metal, gray gradients, Exposé, Mission Control, the Dock, LaunchPad, Sherlock, Spotlight, the list goes on. Simply put, if resisting changes to the things you feel so familiar with is your goal, OS X probably is not your friend. Neither is anything else that's in active development, it's all going to up and change on you. Sorry, bra.

It's not an issue of change it's an issue of being forced to use worse interface just so that MS can try and push their shit on the phones and move programs to their app store. Last thing we need on PC is dumbing down to the phone level. I need my computer for work. That does not mean sitting in full screen weather app and jerking off despite what MS might wish for.

Clearly, using Windows 8 on a normal PC or all-in-one will require a start screen replacement, since full screen apps just don't make sense on larger screens.

I prefer Start8 and will probably end up using that. With a few tweaks, it can be even better. It doesn't try to emulate earlier Windows start menus, it just takes the Metro-style (sorry, the "Windows 8 style-style") and adapts it for larger screens, stopping it from hijacking all your screen real estate jus to launch an application.

UltimateLemon, thank you for the reply. Unfortunately it's just a giant red herring. The UI's emphasis is simply COMPATIBLE with touch interfaces. Think of it as a preventative measure to sucking in the future when everyone is trying to install windows on a tablet. I do not know if you have used Windows 8 with a mouse and keyboard, but I assure you it is quite nice. I happen to use Windows 8 currently at a very large corporation and I must say... I quite enjoy it... although I'll be honest... I do rarely see the start menu since as a developer it's usually the case that I very infrequently change apps beyond OneNote, Visual Studio, a few command prompts, and the browser.

UltimateLemon wrote:

There haven't really been a UI change where the paradigm changed from that of keyboard and mouse to something else.

It didn't change to anything else Mr.Terse. I don't even have Windows 8 installed on a touch screen device.

UltimateLemon wrote:

I haven't played around with the OS nearly long enough to comment on this.

Please. Go use it.

UltimateLemon wrote:

At the end of the day, it's going to come down to adoption rate of people willing to use a UI that was designed with touch screen in mind; possibily with new set of hardware. However, even minute changes in input devices tends to affect people in significant ways; especially in commercial uses where these kinds of changes can have big impact on productivity.

Yes. It will come down to adoption rate, that's almost tautologically true. The success of Microsoft does indeed depend on who buys their shit.

Yes, corporate concerns are of interest to this argument since not every person is a power house of cognitive surplus like you or I. However, you and I do not currently OWN a corporation (I assume) and so this argument is really just a rationalization and has nothing to do with why you or I would not adopt the new OS. It's again, a bit of a red herring, and again just really present on these boards as a means of rationalizations (seriously, what kind of argument is "I will not install windows 8 because the secretary at Corporation X is a bit inept"; though to be fair, I don't think I've seen this exact argument... this is a bit of a straw man on my end)

I played around with a little bit when Ingram Micro was showcasing Windows 8 for its clients. I personally found it a bit disruptive but it was also quite an early beta copy. So it may have changed from my experience.

That said, you don't have to OWN a corporation. Merely working with it is enough. For example, I've worked a fair bit with insurance companies to product their broker engine. In most cases, even 3 extra seconds spent using UI per transaction is considered a blocker. If CTO or CIO belives Windows 8 will add to the overhead time compared to Windows XP or Windows 7, they won't move to it.

I don't particularly want to use the start screen, nor will I be forced to: I'll be moving to Mac OS X full-time and running my Windows apps in VMWare in Unity mode. My company (a very, very large one) is considering a similar move. In a way, separating the apps from the Windows UI was a great thing for me: it finally is helping me leave Windows behind as an OS and simply use it as a runtime in the future.

Running windows like this is pretty nice. You can make one VMware machine, then copy it all around, just like you would any normal file. (I'm talking deployment wise, not for the purposes of piracy.)

I like that idea ... Modern UI apps running fully sandboxed in resizable windows.

I wonder why Microsoft never thought of putting the program's display in a resizable Window. You would think that would be a natural thing to do since techies were raving about that feature when they were playing with Lisa, Amiga, ST, Beos, Linux etc.

Of course the same pundits said it was a useless feature and no one should ever need a multitasking windowed OS capable of showing the output of concurrent processes side by side in resizable windows similar to what was done with that POS Windows 7. Once we get used to the idea of one program per screen we will never look back.

Edit: Yes I do use command.com and batch files still. There are just some things that are easier to do in MS-DOS.

And I am quite happy with Windows 7 64-Bit and anticipate that I can skip this Windows 8 and stick with my setup which works great for me.Everything I am using works fast and smooth.

This is my final stance as well. And if Windows 9 comes out and irks me as much as Windows 8 does, then I'll finally become a Apple full time user, something I've not been since the Apple II.

The new versions of Windows are so different and scary to you that you are going to change platforms instead of using them, because that's what a rational person does: doesn't like change, deliberately chooses a larger change.

That makes no sense.

I love my Mac and OS X is a fine choice for many reasons, but avoiding this push to UI integration isn't one of them. OS X becomes characteristically more iOS-like with every iteration and Apple has never been hesitant to shake up their user interfaces: Pinstripes, Aqua, brushed metal, gray gradients, Exposé, Mission Control, the Dock, LaunchPad, Sherlock, Spotlight, the list goes on. Simply put, if resisting changes to the things you feel so familiar with is your goal, OS X probably is not your friend. Neither is anything else that's in active development, it's all going to up and change on you. Sorry, bra.

If I am going to have to relearn the system, why not change? Sorry bra, works for me. Btw Unless you are Hawaiian calling someone a "bra" makes you a wannabe. Don't be a wannabe. Also since I don't know you I'd prefer you not "bro me, or brah me or bra me."

I am well aware that Apple changes things up btw. Been a user, sometime builder, worked for some years in the industry, of these new fangled devices for around 32 years.

The only thing as stupid as blindly hating new things is to blindly accept change for change's sake.

So, I suppose you're accusing me of blindly accepting windows 8? Any evidence of that or are you just that good at jumping to conclusions without thinking?

Anonymous wrote:

Let me tell you something, despite your rant about "sad nerds", it will actually be nerds (in the non-pejorative sense of tech-savvy individuals) who will have an easier time adapting to the new Start Screen, because nerds are the ones who try out new tech and generally have an easier time picking up changes. Nerds may not *like* all of these new changes, but most will figure this stuff out.

I'm literally the 2nd youngest person in my small company, and when Windows 8 (Release Preview) was introduced to our software development department, not a single other person could figure out how to reboot the PC. These are people who've worked with computers for decades and who are required to test the latest releases of Windows when they come out.

Your story has moved me. "Smart" people could not reboot machine. Must revert to Windows 7.

By the way, you're lucky if that's the only problem your small company has. That's an easy one to fix. YouTube might even have a solution.

Anonymous wrote:

I was the only one who knew how to reboot Windows 8 because I was the only who had previously tried it out in my spare time. Does that make me a nerd? I guess so. Oh well.

I'm a nerd. My attack wasn't against nerds. It's against neuroticism.

You should push for a raise or something though. That's some impressive day saving.

Anonymous wrote:

Point is, none of my other colleagues are "nerdy" enough to have installed Windows 8 on their own, and guess what? They all hate it.

Yeah, so now you're thinking: "Okay, nerds and old people hate Windows 8." Fair enough. But guess what? Lots of "old people" happen to be using Windows for work, and the amount of time (AKA money) spent retraining these people will greater than zero.

Wait. Your POINT (as you write) is that people who have not installed windows 8... hate it? That's a poor premise.

Additionally, try not to put words in my mouth, I don't immediately agree with anything you say. Also, I don't have 'beef' with nerds OR old people. Nor do I see why 'old people' have any influence on future products, nor do 'old people' have any say in MY decision of whether or not *I* (or YOU) should install windows 8. If you're arguing that you hate windows 8 because your company hates windows 8 you are making very little sense. Yes companies will have to train people... that sucks. I think it is a downside. Is it a deal breaker for why I personally should install windows 8? No.

Anonymous wrote:

Can I (as a nerd) adapt to the Start Screen. Definitely. Do I have to like it? No. And you can post as many insulting rants as you want, but you can't force people to accept change, and I don't know why you care that "sad nerds" don't like Windows 8, to be honest. If/when I buy a new laptop, I'll be okay using Windows 8. But unlike Windows 7, I won't rush out and buy an upgrade license.. Sorry if that offends you.

Blah. yes. Blah. no. Sorry if that offends you (why would you write such trite bullshit?)

Anonymous wrote:

The reason people are complaining is because they know that one day they will (practically speaking) be forced to upgrade to Windows 8, one way or another. (e.g. Security updates for 7 will stop, eventually).

Yes. You people will have to upgrade. Thankfully, when you get a new computer the OS will already be preloaded. Chances are that by the time Windows 7 updates stop happening people will be trashing their antiquated machinery, and if not, more than an OS will be forcing them to (browsers, and other software evolve too).

Anonymous wrote:

Not every change is necessarily for the better. A very simple and small example: In Windows Vista, Microsoft removed the "up" button from Windows Explorer, because they felt using the breadcrumbs was a superior method of accessing the parent folder. After much complaining (from "sad nerds", no doubt), the up button is making a comeback in Windows 8.

Spare me your tautologies. I didn't say "Every change is for the better."

Anonymous wrote:

If all change were good, then it wouldn't be possible to bring the up button back after removing it, because that would mean either removing it or bringing it back was a (gasp!) change for the worse.

If Microsoft brings back the Start Menu in some form in Windows 9 (highly unlikely, I know), what will you say then?

"I'm going to Disneyland!" (Sorry, that was a stupid question... so it deserved a stupid response).

Why bother? There is nothing wrong with the way Win7 works. And that's the rub here...Microsoft is not fixing something that is broken. They are doing something that might be quite the opposite. I see no added value in Win8. I don't compute for the sake of the OS, I compute because I need to get shit done. When the OS starts to interfere with my ability to get shit done....that's a problem.

I know I'm not the only one who thinks this.

This! ++

Tabletizing a PC UI is not useful to me, a PC user. The two are completely different environments. I don't want a touchscreen PC or dumbed-down, limited OS cababilities. I want full range, easily accessible OS capabilities in a familiar interface. Things like drag and drop and easy to access command line capability.Give me the improvements of Win8 in a traditional and fully featured semi-classical UI. Why should I waste time learning a completely new interface yet again? (And waste time searching for capabilities that have been hidden.)MS, you spent decades perfecting the user friendliness and capabilities of your UI and OS. Why throw that away just to look new and fresh? You'll lose many of your traditional users. This continued trend may well force me to look to a linux alternative.

Cool. If enough companies write these sort of things then maybe just maybe we will get one that works and can make Win8 usable.

Now, if only they could fix the Charms mess as well, and make it boot natively to desktop we might be approaching a usable system.

Gah, I haven't been so unhappy with a windows release since... well... never, even Vista was a better one. Which is irritating because there is so much good stuff in there that is being obscured by a brain dead 'all pcs are tablets' mentality.

I played around with a little bit when Ingram Micro was showcasing Windows 8 for its clients. I personally found it a bit disruptive but it was also quite an early beta copy. So it may have changed from my experience.

That said, you don't have to OWN a corporation. Merely working with it is enough. For example, I've worked a fair bit with insurance companies to product their broker engine. In most cases, even 3 extra seconds spent using UI per transaction is considered a blocker. If CTO or CIO belives Windows 8 will add to the overhead time compared to Windows XP or Windows 7, they won't move to it.

I didn't say you have to OWN a corporation (or at least, I didn't intend to make that point). The point I am trying to make is that whether or not windows 8 is "corporate friendly" is irrelevant to personal adoption. Perhaps I misread something.

While I am talking to you, I am trying to address the larger audience who is reading these messages. I have some time to kill tonight so I am indulging in some not-so-friendly banter. It's a pointless endeavor, but it is keeping me entertained.

Oh hey look, another article ridiculing the start menu and those who like it!

But, to a more salient point - I believe someone wrote that there's not "recent documents" list in the windows 8 start screen. That can't really be true, can it? What about in the desktop since there's no start menu in Win8?

In the linked thread, a couple of people suggested making a shortcut or symlink to:%USERPROFILE%\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Windows\Recent Items

Quote:

Yes, I saw that, and I made a symbolic link from there to my quicklaunch menu, and that does give you a fan-out menu like in Win7 rather than a useless separate window, but the problem is that it's a giant A-Z list that you have to scroll for a while to even get through.

(Not sure if he really meant symlink or just shortcut, since as I found, a real symlink doesn't work.)

For those of us who didn't re-enable the quicklaunch menu, I tried adding that folder as a toolbar, but Windows wouldn't let me. However, you can drag it to your favorites in Windows Explorer (obviously), and it works okay, I guess. Of course you can also pin it to the Start Screen.

I tried creating a toolbar using the symlink method (with both a directory symlink and a junction), but it didn't work. It seems that "Recent Items" is a special shell folder that can't be used in that way.

However, you can add the parent folder (%USERPROFILE%\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Windows\) as a toolbar, and you'll get the "fan-out" Recent Items menu as a subfolder.

Edit: Actually, if you make a junction point to the "real" folder (%USERPROFILE%\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Windows\Recent), then you can add it as a toolbar, but you'll get a couple of extraneous subfolders: AutomaticDestinations and CustomDestinations. If you hide these folders, then it's pretty much the same thing.

Guess the toolbar workaround is not really usable once you have a lot of items on the list, though, since scrolling through it is not efficient.

Why should I waste time learning a completely new interface yet again?

Maxipad wrote:

This continued trend may well force me to look to a linux alternative.

... seriously... folks... you can't make this shit up.

Maxipad, do you see how contradictory your statements are? Do you guys see what your emotional thought processes are leading you to conclude? Contra-fucking-dictions.

Please inform the people paying for your check (MS) that people don't object to change, they object to stupid change that makes them less efficient at their work. If the change was actually about better workflow and not pushing yet again MS in to tablet and phone space it would be fine. As it is now it's just a pathetic money grab from a company that seems to have serious issues with leadership.

If you're arguing that you hate windows 8 because your company hates windows 8 you are making very little sense.

I never claimed to hate Windows 8. Your argument seems to be that most of the criticism against Windows 8 is irrational and neurotic. You never said that all change is good, but you strongly imply that people hate Windows 8 because they are afraid of change. You don't seem to be open to the possibility that some of the changes in Windows 8 are not for the better.

My point was there are practical reasons to resist change and change isn't always good. I never claimed that my co-workers were "smart", my point was that it's not only sad nerds who hate Windows 8. Most of these people (including management) couldn't care less about computers outside of work; they are about as far from "sad nerds" as you can get. However, I've never seen them have as much trouble or resistance with a new Windows release ever.

Personally, Windows 8 is a mixed bag for me, but I can see why others hate it.

Please inform the people paying for your check (MS) that people don't object to change, they object to stupid change that makes them less efficient at their work. If the change was actually about better workflow and not pushing yet again MS in to tablet and phone space it would be fine. As it is now it's just a pathetic money grab from a company that seems to have serious issues with leadership.

It's both, an efficient and better workflow AND about pushing MS in to tablet and phone space (they are, after all, a business).

Additionally, whether or not MS pays me is irrelevant (ad hominem). The only thing that matters is the facts and consistency of your opinions (rather, that is all I care to attack at this point).

Finally, the leadership in this particular series of arguments is irrelevant (a red herring).

Clearly, you suck at thinking (A fact derived via inductive reasoning with evidence presented above; that is, your post however I may be in danger of generalization so I will seriously refrain from judging you as a complete and total idiot...for now).

I don't particularly want to use the start screen, nor will I be forced to: I'll be moving to Mac OS X full-time and running my Windows apps in VMWare in Unity mode. My company (a very, very large one) is considering a similar move. In a way, separating the apps from the Windows UI was a great thing for me: it finally is helping me leave Windows behind as an OS and simply use it as a runtime in the future.

You're not forced to use the start screen any more than you're forced to use OSX's equivalent, the LaunchPad. Both OSes have many different ways to launch programs, and this is just one of them.

LaunchPad? Start Screen.Dock? Pinned programs on taskbar.Desktop shortcut? Desktop shortcut.Spotlight search? Hit the start key and type first few letters of the program name.Navigate to the program or a shortcut in the Finder? Navigate to the program or a shortcut in File Explorer.

Etc. Switching to OSX to avoid the Windows 8 method of launching programs makes no sense because Mountain Lion and Windows 8 have aesthetically-different-but-functionally-almost-identical methods of launching programs.

I disagree. One is forced to use the Start Screen.

Dock? Has only the barest resemblance to taskbar shortcuts. My dock in OSX has maybe 20 applications due to it's interactive nature, my taskbar has two due to the fact that I do not want it interfering with its main function of showing me what I am currently running.

Desktop shortcut? I personally never use them, having a hatred of desktop clutter. I would be most annoyed should I be forced to use them now. This is true of Windows and OS X.

Spotlight Search? Can you remember every program you have on your computer? I can't. I've had Windows 7 on my machine since launch without a single re-install. Hundreds of applications and games some of which I haven't used in months. I can find them easily though, as when I install them, I have categorised folders in my start menu. So when I want to transcode a video cassette to DVD like I need to this month, I just go to Creativity and look there for what app I'm after.

Navigate to the program or a shortcut in the Finder? OS X has a nice 'Applications' folder with programs that seem to the end user to be just icons. In Windows? Is it in Program Files or Program Files (x86)? Now let's see.... Steam > Steamapps > common > torchlight > torchlight.exe ... easy!

No, you ARE forced to use the Start Screen and having used Windows 8 in a virtual machine for the past few months I can truthfully say, it's horrible. It just doesn't work the way I do and completely gets in the way. It's schizophrenic and I find things a lot harder to find. Unity stopped me using Ubuntu and switch to Linux Mint and XFCE. Gnome 3 caused me to change over to XFCE too. Both are better than Modern UI. This is change to force development for tablet applications. Well I'll be getting a Nexus 7 not a Windows 8 tablet and using the ever improving Android. I'll be using Windows 7 until I have a better alternative and if that means using Linux full time or biting the bullet and getting a new mac, then so be it.

It's funny hearing about ad hominem attacks from someone who came into this thread with flaming away at Windows 8 haters. You are obviously enjoying yourself, but you can hardly criticize others for making personal attacks when practically every post of yours contains irrelevant personal attacks.

Your superior logic and reasoning skills should be sufficient to win your argument without insulting everyone who didn't reach the exact same conclusions about Windows 8 as you did.

And making yourself annoying and ultimately ignored. Usually insulting banter doesn't convince anyone about your points, correct or not.

Yes, it is bad rhetoric. However, reason doesn't persuade either. This way I get to have fun. Don't worry, no one is seriously getting hurt, or injured. Calling people mean names on the internet hardly qualifies as morally disruptive.

Maxipad wrote:

My points are in no way contradictory to me (or others). Maybe you have a cognitive problem.

Yeah, you bemoaning having to learn yet another new interface whilst considering changing to... a whole new interface... are not in anyway contradictory. Well argued, I'm thoroughly convinced. But I'll look further in to this suggestion of a "cognitive problem" (Though I think this is just a euphemistic way of calling me an idiot).

Anonymoose wrote:

I never claimed to hate Windows 8. Your argument seems to be that most of the criticism against Windows 8 is irrational and neurotic. You never said that all change is good, but you strongly imply that people hate Windows 8 because they are afraid of change. You don't seem to be open to the possibility that some of the changes in Windows 8 are not for the better.

Sorry, hate is too strong of a word. You said something like "Do I like blah? No."

I'm not even here to constructively state my opinions of Windows 8 (no one has asked). I am simply attacking all forms of arguments that I have come to see propagate about the internet as of late regarding windows 8. I just grow weary of reading the same bullshit. Now all three of you will think twice before posting nonsense...for the good of humanity (I am honestly under no illusion that I am doing any good this evening).

Quote:

My point was there are practical reasons to resist change and change isn't always good. I never claimed that my co-workers were "smart", my point was that it's not only sad nerds who hate Windows 8. Most of these people (including management) couldn't care less about computers outside of work; they are about as far from "sad nerds" as you can get.

Okay, so fine. Whatever. But do you realize how silly it is to try to defend something so simple as "There are practical reasons to resist change and change isn't always good?" Like, doesn't that just strike you as something that is so obvious and true that it doesn't need to be said?

Now, under the guise that I seem to be some sort of MS whore, I see why you some anonymous stranger over the interwebs would need to make that argument to me... that's fine I guess so I won't berate you for it. I only even bother to attack your post because, again, there are those out there who use this argument as a means of rationalizing their non-use of the product. It's just silly and I am simply out to knock down those conceptions. I'm evil in that way.

Quote:

However, I've never seen them have as much trouble or resistance with a new Windows release ever.

Well.. depending on how old you are (2nd youngest at some small company), you may have never been working in IT during a new windows adoption... so I'm not surprised.

Please inform the people paying for your check (MS) that people don't object to change, they object to stupid change that makes them less efficient at their work. If the change was actually about better workflow and not pushing yet again MS in to tablet and phone space it would be fine. As it is now it's just a pathetic money grab from a company that seems to have serious issues with leadership.

It's both, an efficient and better workflow AND about pushing MS in to tablet and phone space (they are, after all, a business).

Additionally, whether or not MS pays me is irrelevant (ad hominem). The only thing that matters is the facts and consistency of your opinions (rather, that is all I care to attack at this point).

Finally, the leadership in this particular series of arguments is irrelevant (a red herring).

Clearly, you suck at thinking (A fact derived via inductive reasoning with evidence presented above; that is, your post however I may be in danger of generalization so I will seriously refrain from judging you as a complete and total idiot...for now).

Must be why so many professionals agree that what they want is full screen apps that are dumbed down to phone levels. I'm sure it's great for people who do a lot of minesweeper so now they can concentrate on it on their desktops. Full screen is best so you don't get distracted by other things.

Not even MS thinks this is better work flow. That's why they are going on and on about how you will recognise yourself on your phone. My desktop is for completely different type of work compared to my phone so them sharing the interface is hardly something positive.

PS: Did MS think that having a bribed writer was not enough so they hand to send additional forces to make people understand how awesome it is to do things in full screen, one app at the time (the crap in metro is not worth calling program). BTW did you try using win8 in vmware... Real fun with all the corners.

"But it's also an intrinsic, unavoidable part of the Windows 8 experience. Windows 8 users will have to use the Start screen and will have to get used to it."

Actually, no they don't Peter. This isn't an Apple machine people are buying. One of the better features about Windows has always been that there were several ways of doing the same thing. Microsoft have slavishly copied Apple by insisting that there way is the only way.

If you insist your customers "have to get used to something", you really shouldn't be in business. The general idea is to give the customers what they are asking for. Not tell them what they have to use.

However, I've never seen them have as much trouble or resistance with a new Windows release ever.

Well.. depending on how old you are (2nd youngest at some small company), you may have never been working in IT during a new windows adoption... so I'm not surprised.

There *you* go, jumping to conclusions based on incomplete information. I'm in my early 30s, it just happens to be a very "old" company. The first product I worked on had to support Windows 95, and a current product has to support Windows Server 2012.

I am not *quite* as stupid or intellectually dishonest as you think I am, to write the sentence you quoted with the (weaselly) meaning you ascribed to it. To be clear, I've seen the department deal with new Windows releases in the past, and they've never reacted so strongly as they did with Windows 8/Server 2012. Some people questioned the utility of "putting the tablet interface in a server OS". (Their words, not mine.)

And it's not IT per se (which in our company, deals with software used by everyone in the office), but development (which deals with the products we make, many of which support Windows.) Our office just moved from XP to Windows 7, you can bet IT won't be rolling out Windows 8 any time soon. The reactions I'm speaking of are from people who develop and test software, and also from their managers.

I'm not even here to constructively state my opinions of Windows 8 (no one has asked). I am simply attacking all forms of arguments that I have come to see propagate about the internet as of late regarding windows 8. I just grow weary of reading the same bullshit.

Ok, I'm asking.

With regards your other points, grow up and understand that people do not have to have the same opinion as you, it isn't bullshit, and please spare us the melodrama. It's absurd you state that you "grow weary" as thought it is some noble quest of slaying dragons to save the village. No-one asked you to do this, nor are you likely to change their opinion, not matter how much you stamp your feet and scream.

Must be why so many professionals agree that what they want is full screen apps that are dumbed down to phone levels. I'm sure it's great for people who do a lot of minesweeper so now they can concentrate on it on their desktops. Full screen is best so you don't get distracted by other things.

Not even MS thinks this is better work flow. That's why they are going on and on about how you will recognise yourself on your phone. My desktop is for completely different type of work compared to my phone so them sharing the interface is hardly something positive.

PS: Did MS think that having a bribed writer was not enough so they hand to send additional forces to make people understand how awesome it is to do things in full screen, one app at the time (the crap in metro is not worth calling program). BTW did you try using win8 in vmware... Real fun with all the corners.

Sterling stuff.

I am a professional software developer. I use windows 8. Other SDEs here use Windows 8. No one has any issues. Workflow is better if not the same (some tasks are ever so slightly better).

"Not even MS thinks this is better work flow."Stop. Just stop talking. MS's developers use the OS internally (I assume). Don't you think that if there was a huge issue with workflow they'd have ditched it asap?

Either way, arguing with your imagination is a waste of time.

I do not use VMWare. I use Hyper-V. I do not have a problem with 'corners'.

Is it really so difficult for to comprehend that not everyone has to share the same opinion, nor are they an idiot or wrong for doing so.

Has it ever crossed your mind, just once, that the dislike for the new Metro interface is actually real, and fully justified to some people?

Or are you so dictatorial that you simply cannot accept this without becoming angry and insulting.

Just because you like something, does not follow the whole world should fall into line. You have problems with your ego if you think this.

My advice, would be to step away from the keyboard. You're not going to change someone's mind by calling them an idiot.

And for third parties such as myself, you lose all credibility in everything you say when you take this approach. You're not some superior intellect, you're just another guy on the Internet. Deal with it.

There *you* go, jumping to conclusions based on incomplete information. I'm in my early 30s, it just happens to be a very "old" company. The first product I worked on had to support Windows 95, and a current product has to support Windows Server 2012.

I am not *quite* as stupid or intellectually dishonest as you think I am, to write the sentence you quoted with the (weaselly) meaning you ascribed to it. To be clear, I've seen the department deal with new Windows releases in the past, and they've never reacted so strongly as they did with Windows 8.

Er.. did you not see the word "DEPENDING?" Gosh, you're touchy when you're tired. I did not know how old you were, so I said "Depending on how old you are..."

But still... what are we talking here... like 2 releases? 1? Come on. Anyways, it doesn't matter. It will probably be a difficult transition for those not as technically adept. I certainly hope MS has some plans, or advice (like, maybe making big ol' tiles for E-Mail, Calendar, etc.) to help facilitate the learning. I sure hope your IT guys can get it together to make it easy for the rest of the company (it is their job, right?).

There *you* go, jumping to conclusions based on incomplete information. I'm in my early 30s, it just happens to be a very "old" company. The first product I worked on had to support Windows 95, and a current product has to support Windows Server 2012.

I am not *quite* as stupid or intellectually dishonest as you think I am, to write the sentence you quoted with the (weaselly) meaning you ascribed to it. To be clear, I've seen the department deal with new Windows releases in the past, and they've never reacted so strongly as they did with Windows 8.

Er.. did you not see the word "DEPENDING?" Gosh, you're touchy when you're tired. I did not know how old you were, so I said "Depending on how old you are..."

But still... what are we talking here... like 2 releases? 1? Come on. Anyways, it doesn't matter. It will probably be a difficult transition for those not as technically adept. I certainly hope MS has some plans, or advice (like, maybe making big ol' tiles for E-Mail, Calendar, etc.) to help facilitate the learning. I sure hope your IT guys can get it together to make it easy for the rest of the company (it is their job, right?).

Guys, seriously, you have a difference of opinion. We get the idea you disagree. Neither of you are authorities on this subject. And your opinions are equally as valid as each others. If you wish to continue, please collect your handbags and take it elsewhere.

First off, that quote was because that guy thinks the author and I am in cohorts to 'defend the MS frontier' via Ars Technica or some weird shit.

But, once more,

Quote:

Is it really so difficult for to comprehend that not everyone has to share the same opinion, nor are they an idiot or wrong for doing so.

No. I do not have issues with comprehension, I have issues with silly rationalizations. I'm simply picking on people who display said behavior. I have tried to make myself clear about that. Obviously I am failing miserably.

Quote:

Has it ever crossed your mind, just once, that the dislike for the new Metro interface is actually real, and fully justified to some people?

If it is justified, they have failed to vocalize said justifications. Though they certainly try with some fallacious reasoning.

Quote:

Or are you so dictatorial that you simply cannot accept this without becoming angry and insulting.

I promise, I am amused, not angry. The sarcastic tone is for my own amusement.

Quote:

Just because you like something, does not follow the whole world should fall into line. You have problems with your ego if you think this.

I'm not autistic.

Quote:

My advice, would be to step away from the keyboard. You're not going to change someone's mind by calling them an idiot.

Brilliant shit.

Quote:

And for third parties such as myself, you lose all credibility in everything you say when you take this approach. You're not some superior intellect, you're just another guy on the Internet. Deal with it.

Come on, my nickname is "AfroFire" and I am posting on an Ars Technica forum at midnight in response to some poor decision by Samsung, did I really have any credibility to begin with?

Once more, I have addressed the fact that I am under no illusion that I am capturing hearts and minds. This is for my own amusement. Take it easy.

Guys, seriously, you have a difference of opinion. We get the idea you disagree. Neither of you are authorities on this subject. And your opinions are equally as valid as each others. If you wish to continue, please collect your handbags and take it elsewhere.

Actually, if you had followed the thread, you would see I agree with him on this point.

Anyways, it doesn't matter. It will probably be a difficult transition for those not as technically adept. I certainly hope MS has some plans, or advice (like, maybe making big ol' tiles for E-Mail, Calendar, etc.) to help facilitate the learning. I sure hope your IT guys can get it together to make it easy for the rest of the company (it is their job, right?).

It will be a difficult transition, and some of us are not convinced it's a necessary transition at all. Yeah, we get that Microsoft wants to jump on the tablet bandwagon before it's too late, but was it really necessary to penalize desktop users in doing so?

It's too bad, because some of the changes to the desktop UI are pretty decent (improved Task Manager, better copy/move conflict resolution, Explorer ribbon), but forcing people to use the Metro Start Screen just doesn't seem like an unambiguously good change.

Yes, young and/or tech-savvy people will have no problem adapting. But despite the decent built-in search features available in the Start Menu since Vista/2008, most of my co-workers still insist on navigating the folder hierarchy to find the program they are looking for.

Of course, this is the point of getting rid of the Start Menu: to force people to change. We get that. It's the same reason that applications which have adopted the Ribbon do not have a "classic UI" mode. But in this case, instead of users forcing themselves to learn an arguably more efficient way of doing things, they may just end up sticking with Windows 7, especially in a business setting.

You may say personal adoption is more important than business adoption, but I wonder where Microsoft would be today if Windows and Office weren't ubiquitous in most office settings. Are these the users and organizations Microsoft really wants to piss off? Of course, most Windows-centric businesses will probably not switch to Linux or Mac OS X, but they may not upgrade to Windows 8 for a long time, either. And Microsoft will only have themselves to blame.

Must be why so many professionals agree that what they want is full screen apps that are dumbed down to phone levels. I'm sure it's great for people who do a lot of minesweeper so now they can concentrate on it on their desktops. Full screen is best so you don't get distracted by other things.

Not even MS thinks this is better work flow. That's why they are going on and on about how you will recognise yourself on your phone. My desktop is for completely different type of work compared to my phone so them sharing the interface is hardly something positive.

PS: Did MS think that having a bribed writer was not enough so they hand to send additional forces to make people understand how awesome it is to do things in full screen, one app at the time (the crap in metro is not worth calling program). BTW did you try using win8 in vmware... Real fun with all the corners.

Sterling stuff.

I am a professional software developer. I use windows 8. Other SDEs here use Windows 8. No one has any issues. Workflow is better if not the same (some tasks are ever so slightly better).

"Not even MS thinks this is better work flow."Stop. Just stop talking. MS's developers use the OS internally (I assume). Don't you think that if there was a huge issue with workflow they'd have ditched it asap?

Either way, arguing with your imagination is a waste of time.

I do not use VMWare. I use Hyper-V. I do not have a problem with 'corners'.

P.S. You're an idiot.

MS is clearly pushing for tablet and phone space. What people think about the work flow will have no impact on the direction. Look at the new office. Whoever thought that's how a usable program should look like was on drugs. It's super bright and bland. Hard to see any borders or separation between different things. Now you will tell me how its soothing to the nerves that everything looks the same and if it's too bright you should turn on the light in the room (ofc that doesn't fix the contrast but hey, we are avoiding issues here).

Do you run win8 in a window and not full screen mode perhaps? I doubt that hyper-v makes it magically easier to hit corners in a windowed VM.

Did MS think that having a bribed writer was not enough so they hand to send additional forces

Weird. Your comment indicates you're new here and so don't know who Peter Bright is, but your post count is too high. Maybe you bought this account from eBay.

Either way, you've obviously never read a thing he's written.

I'm old enough that I've noticed clear moving towards being more PR for certain companies than a tech site. Peter is heavily pushing MS win8 agenda from what I've seen of his writing. Kinda like Casey is pro Apple and anything that doesn't have the apple logo is bad and blaha.

I guess we will just have to see if MS can push through this crap with help of its massive marketing budget.

The start screen works just as the start menu.you want to open a program? Just start typing or look for it in the installed apps.

It adds that you can have useful information available inmediatly without having to open an application.Want to know if there some new notification in facebook? just check the start screen. Want to know the current weather? Check the start screen. Want to know if you have a new email? Also check the start screen.

Windows 8 also, is faster than Windows 7.

And one more thing, after Windows 8 is released we will get TONS of new applications that were before only available to mobile devices(songify, tons of games). It will also be easier to find applications than before.

Embrace change. Embrace Darwin.

It's one thing to embrace change, it's another to be forced into it. When Windows 95 came out, people could still set it to work like Windows 3.11. Yet the concept of a Start Menu was so clearly better that it took off and was even copied in Linux environments.

This time I think Microsoft knows that Modern UI (Metro) is far from guaranteed to be a success, but they are so far behind in the tablet space that they need to force development of applications for their new environment. Hence their latest free development tools only support Metro and they are removing every loophole they can find that allows the reinstatement of the Start Menu. It demonstrates a clear lack of confidence on their part and a desperate need to get developers to support their tablet environment.

I realise that there are probably as many people that like the new interface as hate it amongst us geeks and this may be down to how we think. For some people it's relatively intuitive, for others it's just horrible as the OS seems to work against us.

For my part I think it's a half-baked implementation. There are too many things that need access via the legacy interface for it to stand up on its own. I don't like it in and of itself, but would be more willing to learn to adapt if there was more to adapt to. It certainly hinders my way of multitasking and as for checking the weather or being aware of emails, funnily enough I can do both of those right now without even leaving my current application. Loading up the Start Screen is an uncomfortable intrusion to my working environment. As for applications being easy to find, I think quite the contrary. I'm sure for some people it will indeed be the case that they are easier to find, but for someone like me it makes it a LOT harder to do so.

And what is key to all this? Choice, or lack thereof. Microsoft lack the confidence to allow users to NOT use Metro whilst at the same time lacking the confidence to implement everything in Metro and thus make it the sole interface for Windows 8.

At core, Windows 8 is a solid improvement over Windows 7, but it's interface is an insipid, half-baked attempt to gain market share in an area where they have dropped the ball. It's this lack of confidence, this unwillingness to either go all the way or let users choose their own way of working that I find most unforgivable.

I don't particularly want to use the start screen, nor will I be forced to: I'll be moving to Mac OS X full-time and running my Windows apps in VMWare in Unity mode. My company (a very, very large one) is considering a similar move. In a way, separating the apps from the Windows UI was a great thing for me: it finally is helping me leave Windows behind as an OS and simply use it as a runtime in the future.

So what are you going to do when Apple adopts the same sort of stupid "touch optimized" desktop UI that is trending in the industry?

Linux w/Crossover or WINE as Linux has always had the attitude of "If you don't like it...that's okay try one of these 2 dozen alternatives instead"

Of course the program selection will be more limited as most developers will continue to focus on Windows and the compatibility projects will always be playing catchup.

But I expect that 5 years after the ModernUI becomes mainstream with the consumer release of Win8 the majority opinion will be "Why do people still insist on running that awful Win7???"

Anyways, it doesn't matter. It will probably be a difficult transition for those not as technically adept. I certainly hope MS has some plans, or advice (like, maybe making big ol' tiles for E-Mail, Calendar, etc.) to help facilitate the learning. I sure hope your IT guys can get it together to make it easy for the rest of the company (it is their job, right?).

It will be a difficult transition, and some of us are not convinced it's a necessary transition at all. Yeah, we get that Microsoft wants to jump on the tablet bandwagon before it's too late, but was it really necessary to penalize desktop users in doing so?

It's too bad, because some of the changes to the desktop UI are pretty decent (improved Task Manager, better copy/move conflict resolution, Explorer ribbon), but forcing people to use the Metro Start Screen just doesn't seem like an unambiguously good change.

Yes, young and/or tech-savvy people will have no problem adapting. But despite the decent built-in search features available in the Start Menu since Vista/2008, most of my co-workers still insist on navigating the folder hierarchy to find the program they are looking for.

Of course, this is the point of getting rid of the Start Menu: to force people to change. We get that. It's the same reason that applications which have adopted the Ribbon do not have a "classic UI" mode. But in this case, instead of users forcing themselves to learn an arguably more efficient way of doing things, they may just end up sticking with Windows 7, especially in a business setting.

You may say personal adoption is more important than business adoption, but I wonder where Microsoft would be today if Windows and Office weren't ubiquitous in most office settings. Are these the users and organizations Microsoft really wants to piss off? Of course, most Windows-centric businesses will probably not switch to Linux or Mac OS X, but they may not upgrade to Windows 8 for a long time, either. And Microsoft will only have themselves to blame.

Alright, this will have to be my last post. I am tired as crap.

I have agreed with you already about the difficulty that some people will have to face. When you have 100 million customers though, 1-2% of the 'grandparents' out there hardly matter. That's the price this company pays for being big.

Additionally, the offices out there where Microsoft makes a huge amount of income may seemingly experience some growing pains. My office is full of well informed individuals who embraced the new OS without any issue, but we're like that here and we're definitely the exception. But the reason why I mention it is this: I don't know what most offices will go through. I do not work at most offices.